< meta name="DC.Date.Valid.End" content="20050827">

Catastrophic Success

As if there weren't enough political opinionating out there, I, too, now sing the body bloglectric. Let me FEED you![XML]

Location: United States

Friday, December 31, 2004


John Derbyshire at NRO, amongst many other things, discusses how 2005 is not an interesting number. He also requests submissions as to why it is, in fact interesting, in order to prove his theorem that there is no such thing as an uninteresting number if only because any uninteresting number could be the lowest uninteresting number in a set of uninteresting numbers, which is an interesting thing indeed. I suspecte that by interesting, he means mathematically interesting, but not being a mathemagician, I don't know about mathematicallt intersting, but I did send him this intersting tidbit:
"It will be interesting to watch the stock market this year. Since it ends in 5, it is poised to perform well (at least historically speaking: http://www.financialsense.com/metals/speck/121504.html). If John Kerry had won the election, he would be getting all of the credit for a resounding stock market success, but since Bush created it and Bush will be in office, the media is going to have to downplay with all of their might."

If some of my readers, all of whom are obviously more intelligent than I, judging by the prodigious lack of comments (which indicates that my inane ramblings are unworthy of wasting their vast brains upon), have more reasons that 2005 is an interesting number, mathemagically or otherwise, please let John know, and leave me a note or email cuz I'd like to know too.

I hope everyone has a safe and happy New Year, for those on the Gregorian Calendar, and for those of you on the Julian Calendar, Happy Friday, and for those of you on the Hebraic Calendar, Shabbat Shalom.

Thursday, December 30, 2004


At 2:06 Central Time today, I received my 500th unique visitor. Whoever it was lives in (or at least receives internet connection from) Peoria, IL, so if it wasn't the Peoria Pundit it was one of his readers, many of whom have wandered this way lately. Welcome! Stick around, leave me a note. Thanks Bill!

Wednesday, December 29, 2004

If it walks like a duck...

Since the vast majority of terrorism is committed by Muslims, is it unfair that a fictional portrayal of an FBI Counter-Terrorism Unit would feature a predominately Muslim terrorist enemy?

I don't believe so, any more than fictional accounts of the mafia feature predominately Italian characters (although the Italian-American groups have long protested those as well). I'm no more offended by the portrayal of the Gangs of New York as Irish hooligans than these people should be since, historically, those gangs were MADE UP OF IRISH HOOLIGANS!

I know that the argument is that such characterizations perpetuate negative stereotypes, but they are NOT stereotypes if they are based in fact. The fact is, a very large number of Muslims around the world wish to destroy us, the Great Satan. They are willing to use any means necessary to do so, including throwing fuel-rich airplanes into shining skyscrapers on an otherwise normal Tuesday morning. Not all Muslims, and certainly few American Muslims, believe this way, but the fact remains that Muhammad Atta and his cohort lived and worked in the United States, living seemingly normal lives until their "sleeper cell" was activated from word on high to commit the greatest atrocity on American soil in modern times.

Therefore, it stands to reason that a screenwriter could credibly create a family-based sleeper cell as an enemy for a fictional television series centered around counter-terrorism. In fact, being an avid watcher of 24, I'm positive that since the family is given as the enemy in the premiere that it will be revealed by week seven that the real enemy is some French anarchist (or better, in Hollywood's eyes, a disgruntled former American intelligence operator) or something who is using this family's religious devotion to manipulate them into taking America down a peg and destroy the purveyor of cultural filth and poisonous individualism.

No one can credibly convince another person that all Muslims are terrible horrible people worthy of interment (or obliteration) based on the "evidence" of this fictional television show. On the other hand, people can be convinced of the need to protect American interests by spreading democracy in parts of the world where individual expression is unflinchingly quashed and dissent from received wisdom punishable by death based on the evidence of two falling skyscrapers and a burning office building with a hole punched in it from a speeding jet plane. Reality is reality and let's let the TV alone.

This does highlight the need, however, of an Al-Martin bin Luther. Where is the reforming Muslim with his 95 Theses to state that (#37)"Every true Muslim, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Allah and the Church; and this is granted him by Allah, even without letters of pardon;" or (#47) 43. "Muslims are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than blowing up Israeli coffee shops?"

Martin Luther did more than rail against the sale of Indulgences, the practice of removing the spiritual pain of a particular sin (after repentence and penance, by doctrine) for a fee. The historical narrative suggests that Luther nailed the theses to the Church door in hopes of reforming the Catholic Church through a bold maneuver. His intent is irrelevent in this case, though, as the result is what matters.

The Protestant Reformation is marked by the spread of the meme that "Man and God can directly communicate, and the relationship between them is a personal one, and that each Christian can interpret the Scripture through his own lens and intellect." This is tremendously powerful meme and its spread can be traced through the creation of hundreds (thousands?) of Protestant Christian denominations. There are many of them, yet only one Catholic Church (I don't count the Greek Orthodox as a Catholic Church - with the Schism they become a different church, like the Anglican Split). They are the result of people having a better different view of man's relationship to God.

The Shiites, Sunni, Baath only differ in the degree to which the believers must be subjugated and propogandized to; there is still no tolerance of a better different idea. Even though an imam supposedly can be anyone who has sufficiently studied the Qu'ran and applied his understanding to it, I haven't heard of an Imam that is preaching the benefits of treating women as full humans or of reaching in peace to their Abrahamic cousins, the Jews (or the Christians for that matter).

This lack of a Reformation is a key reason the Muslim countries have not and CAN not leave their third-world status behind them. There is no belief in the power of the individual to achieve. If an individual can not achieve grace through his own belief and interpretation of the Holy Scripture, how can he achieve any material success on Earth? The Protestant Reformation led directly to the Industrial Revolution of Adam Smith and the British, American and French Enlightenments (see: Gertrude Himmelfarb’s The Roads to Modernity, reveiwed here on ChicagoBoyz.net). By stressing the ability of the individual to think for himself and reach God through his own reason, Luther ushered in an entire revolution of thought that brought Europe out of the Dark Ages and sowed the seeds of America's greatness.

The top-down belief-by-fiat structure of the Catholic Church ensured that only the annointed, the priestly hierarchy, could interpret the Word, and therefore, the Will, of God. This discouraged independent thought in one of the most important aspects of an everyday European's life - religion - which bled over into other areas of life. Work was done much the same as one's father did his work. There was heavy investment in tradition and "the way things have always been." Luther's founding of Lutheranism and the spread of the Gutenberg press encouraged indepedent thought, creativity, invention and, most importantly, reliance on the individual as the engine of success.

Without such distribution of power, the Sheikdoms and Mullocracies of the Middle East are doomed to fail, again and again, causing greater and greater frustration amongst their citizenry because they believe, due to the violent encouragement of it, that their governments are the only vehicle for change and success; that the only reason they can't change or succeed is because of forces beyond their control. There is no acceptance of fault for lack of improvement in their lives because they can't believe they have any power over their own lives. Without the meme of a personally founded relationship with Allah, through his prophet Muhammad, as given in the Qu'ran (much as Protestant Christians have a personally founded relationship with God, through his Son Jesus Christ, as given in the New Testament), Muslims can not accept that their lives are unpleasant through their own failure to act. They don't believe they have the power to act of their own volition and their sense of free will seems stunted. Debate about the interplay between Free Will and God's Will goes no farther than Inshallah (God willing) as compared with the historied debate in Christianity.

I am hopeful that like Martin Luther, the theses of Afghani and Iraqi democracy will revitalize the spirit of science, technology and modernity shown by the Moors in their time (although they were conquerors, but just about anyone who was anyone was getting in on the conquering game at the time).

[I have qualms about this post, but I'm pushed for time, so I'll clean it later].

New Addition to Blogroll

I added Bill Dennis' Peoria Pundit to my blog feed. He's funny, political, a geek and a former journo (a lot like me, except he was a real professional and didn't give up after two years in the newsroom of his college newspaper and more J-School than he could handle). Plus, he's from Illinois, which makes him cool, even though he went to the hated Eastern Illinois University rather than the obviously superior Western Illinois University. His sore luck, I'm sure.

Give him a read.

Tuesday, December 28, 2004


I have joined the Truth Laid Bear (N.Z. Bear) Ecosystem. I don't really know what this means other than my links to other bloggers now are counted for their totals. I am unsure, however, how I feel about being known as an insignificant microbe... especially since I posted it on my blogroll for all the world to see. Ah well, we all start from a single cell, do we not?

Survival of the Sabre-Toothed Fittest

The Diplomad postulates the Sabre-Tooth Tiger Law of Life. Essentially, anyone over the age of forty, especially with any aid at all from Modern Science, Engineering and Medicine (MSEAM) does so on borrowed time and are essentially Intel 286s boosted to run Windows XP.

I have had similar epiphanies about living in the modern world. We evolved to live only so long and the man who lives to 76 should be the great outlier, not the rule. However, modern advances increasingly extend this life expectancy long past our natural construction. In fact, three score and ten is beginning to sound more and more criminally short. Life wasn't supposed to begin at forty, it should have ended there.

My approach to these ideas, though, were not so much the same as the Diplomad's; I actually began worrying about how much we have screwed up evolution. Survival of the Fittest almost no longer works. We have so many ways of saving the lives of the "un-fit" that those who would have been eaten first by the Sabre-Tooths (Sabre-Teeth?) now survive well into adulthood and live full rich lives (as is only right). What that also means is that those who would not have lived to propagate their genes because they are slower runners, not as bright, mentally or physically disabled now can and do. And good for them (me included). I have no qualms admitting that I would be Smilodon food (to continue the Diplomad's metaphor). Although young, I am not fast, strong of body or skilled with weaponry. I am smart so I may have been able to distract the giant feline with logic puzzles, but I have serious doubts about the efficacy of such a maneuver. MSEAM allows me to find meaninful employment to be able to provide for my family in ways Ugg Bixby (my ancient caveman ancestor, of course) never could have imagined. I have propogated my genetic code twice now. I would likely not have survived to do so 5000 years ago.

I wonder then, is the human race better off for having it so easy? In the numbers game, we certainly beat the rest of the mammals. 6 billion of us is an awful lot. We have adapted to the environment so well that we can now adapt the environment to us. So will environments that are the most fit for human habitation now survive and propogate by converting (if possible) un-fit environments to better fits? When it becomes possible, I would say it becomes probable. However, that is a long slog uphill, especially against environmentalists and "indiginous people advocates". But that's a digression anyway. Is humanity better off for throwing off the shackles of Natural Selection? Eugenics advocates would say yes and no - no, because now too many un-fits survive and yes because Artificial Selection (as determined by their arbitrary rules, surely) can do more, better and faster. Not being a Eugenics advocate, I disregard such assertions on their face because they instantly devalue certain humans based on stupidly arbitrary criteria (physical or mental measurements which are valued differently from Eugenisist to Eugenisist).

I think though that a shift toward protection of life is in the best interest of the human race. Too many people would have been lost to the tigers who have done valuable services to humanity. Albert Einstein was 36 when he published his definitive paper on the General Theory of Relativity and Stephen Hawking was diagnosed with ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease) at 21 when he began stumbling and having difficulty walking. Both of them would most probably have been culled from the human herd (with apologies to Glenn Reynolds). Considering that the research by these two men alone may allow humanity to spread to distant worlds, I suspect that MSEAM is doing the human collective body good.

I still wonder though what genetic mutation we are helping to keep alive, but preventing from widespread dissemination by helping so many humans survive. What this boils down to is, "Where are the superheroes? Where are the X-Men?" Where is Homo Superior? Does the abrogation of Natural Selection prevent "market share" of these super-genes?

Just the rumblings in my brain. There's no political advocacy here. Move along.

Friday, December 24, 2004

Happy Holidays :)

Happy Chrismahanukwanzakah from a Atheistic Ex-Lutheran with strong interest in religions and Judaism in particular!

Or as a friend of mine just wished me "Merry Wintereenmas!"

Have a safe and fun holiday!

Tuesday, December 21, 2004

Thank you Mr. Den Beste

While I was off-line last week, Nelson at Europundit speculated about Stephen Den Beste coming back to the blogosphere. I must say that I harbored the same hope. SDB had explained his writing process as something that burst forth from him after percolating in his subconscious for a while. He would then compose, edit and post the resulting brainstorm. He was always a brightspot in black hole of the internet. I would anxiously await a post from him, because I always knew that he would provide some insight, viewpoint or perspective that I either was completely unaware of, believed already but for vague reasons, or was dead against and he at least provided a reasoned argument against it.

It is because of him that words like Jacksonian, mechanist, Transnational Progressivism and Philosophical Idealism (p-idealism) have entered my vocabulary. I spent inordinate amounts of time searching his site for more insight and more information and more of the world as seen through the eyes of a systems engineer. Then, about 6 months after I found his page, he abruptly decided to quit. He had intimated for a long time that the energy required to sift through the trash thrown his way by the ignorant was not worth putting forth anymore and that keeping the blog was just no fun for him. It had been sucked out by those energy vampires. I suspected that given time, his subconscious would not let him rest until he purged the backup of information caused by an extended absence. I was wrong.

In Nelson's comments, SDB reveals the deeper reason for quitting. He has a deteriorating debilitating disease that he is fighting, but can not cure. In order to make his posts, he was consuming increasingly larger quantities of a medication that had very unpleasant side effects. The scale finally tipped where the pain of the side effects outweighed the pleasure of blogging. I hereby put away my hopes of SDB returning to the blogosphere beyond Chizumatic and relish the archives of the USS Clueless (ever may she fly). I wish Mr. Den Beste all the dignity and quality of life I qould wish for myself.

I don't have any information beyond what was posted by SDB at Nelson's site (also archived at Rishon Rishon for posterity). I don't know if it is a debilitation of the body or the mind, but either is a crime. The disabilities I find most unjust are those which trapped a brilliant mind in a withering body. I find far too many examples of weak or incapable brains in exceptional bodies, I suppose universal balance (were I to believe in such things) would dictate exceptional minds in weak or incapable bodies, but it still frustrates me on their behalf. The most obvious example is Dr. Stephen Hawking, probably our most intelligent fellow human of our age. If such a fate is destined for Mr. Den Beste, then it only proves that any omnipotent deity has too acute a sense of irony or black humor to be worth worshipping.

Mr. Den Beste was highly influential on me as an American, a thinker and as a blogger. I prefer his essay style to the "Here-have-a-link" blogs like LGF or MetaFilter and, in fact, I try for that here as well. I also like to point people to links I find interesting so there will be some of that here, but most of my posts are attempts at nearing SDB's greatness. I think all blogs out there have a blogfather or blogmother. It's not the person who introduced you to blogs necessarily, but the person who defined, by example, what a blog and what blogging is. Mr. Den Beste is my blogfather. I owe him thanks for that.

I want to thank him from a grateful nation. His words performed a service desperately needed at the beginning of the War on Terror, although I didn't discover him until later. His essays resound with the American Spirit throughout and I can think of no greater compliment than to call him a Great American. I found a kindred spirit behind his posts and, although, he'll never know who I am, or that I even wrote this, I will be forever thankful that he was there.

I know that I might have two or three regular readers, but I would encourage everyone to visit his site, and in the late evening to download his entire library (but not everyone at once, he pays for his own bandwidth).

On the off-chance you read this Mr. Den Beste, thank you and I wish you all the best.

Monday, December 20, 2004


Ana Marie Cox, better known under her Nom de Blog, Wonkette was the subject of the MSNBC Fast Chat interview (3 questions) this week. She talks about the incestuous relationship between bloggers and journalists, calling it a bastardized "Tracy-Hepburn" affair. She also calls blogging a resume builder for wannabe-journalists. Aside from the fact that I find that incredibly unlikely, considering I don't know of many bloggers on the right (which, in the interest of full disclosure, are almost the only ones I read) who have any desire at all to be "real" journalists excepting Mark Steyn who has made that transition pretty well, all those folks at NRO since they were journalists first and maybe Glenn Reynolds.

What I found most glaring in the interviewlet was this Q&A:

What did you think of the bloggers' role in the Dan Rather affair?
I think they did a disservice to the debate because they made the debate about the documents and not about the president of the United States. There was another half to that story that had to do with verifiable events of what Bush may have been up to.

So are we going back to fake but accurate? The bloggers made the debate about the documents and not the accusations they were being used to support? How dare they? After all, if an accusation comes from the MSM and/or the Left, especially if it elegantly blends in with their worldview expectations, then it must be true on its face. Any "evidence" only supports the veracity of the allegation, it doesn't actually determine the veracity. So she is upset (along with Dan Rather) because when the only evidence supporting this accusation that she so wants to be true turns out to be faked, the public casts doubt on these aspersions. She seriously can't believe that just because Dan Rather said it, on 60 Minutes no less, that people don't just accept it as the received wisdom that she does.

She doesn't get it, living in her Washington, DC fishbowl, that Americans pride themselves on not being sheep, especially when other people want us to. I don't think she's going to get it any time soon.

Saturday, December 18, 2004


I know that after a busy November full of posts, this December has made it appear that I fell off the face of the Earth. That's not true, I was just vacationing there. I took my final week of vacation time from work this past week and I have been tremendously enjoying the ample time I have been able to spend with Missus Bixby (not her real name) and the Bixblets (also not their real name). I don't know if I have mentioned it, but I have two beautiful daughters (aged 3 and 1). I love them both a great deal (as should be expected), but beyond that, I also adore them beyond words. They are the bright spots in my day and are the best cure for a bad day I have ever experienced. Of course, this takes nothing away from my wife. She is the joy that makes all pleasure possible. I don't intend to ramble about my family in such a manner again, but I felt like it today and it explains my absence from the blogosphere for the last week.

My first daughter, Bixblet the Elder, joined me in my shopping excursion on Wednesday to the Mall of Shopping. While most men I know would recoil at the thought of braving a Christmastime Mall with a three-year-old in tow, I am not most men. I actually found it the quickest path to get into the Christmas spirit. The sole purpose of the expedition was to buy gifts for Missus Bixby for both Christmas and her closely pursuing birthday. This spirit of giving permeated our entire experience, as well as the Missus calling is a Daddy/Daughter Date. I was determined not to spoil any of the good vibes we had going so as we trekked from store to store we sang Christmas Carols and watched for Santa and talked about Christmas and family. This is the first Christmas that Bixblet the Elder has really "gotten in to." The Missus and I are trying to share the magic of Christmas with as much as possible, watching Christmas movies, singing songs, counting down to Christmas night and planning what kind of cookies to leave for Santa and how much grass and carrots Rudolph (her favorite reindeer by far) might need.

This kind of led to a brief discussion the Missus and I had about how deceitful one must sometimes be as a parent. I think that will be the topic of the next post, this paragraph is really here to remind me to post more on this. I will, now, however, return to my quickly diminishing vacation and will resume posting on Monday or thereabouts.

A pointless post, perhaps, but it allowed me to wish everyone many happy returns to the holiday season and remember to cherish your family because they are the source of your memories. Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Blessed Ramadan, etc.

Monday, December 13, 2004

Tanks for everything, guys and gals

I posted this as a comment to this post by The Diplomad regarding their experiences with the stalwart young Marine Security Guards who stand watch over our embassies and protect our Foreign Service Personnel. Their tribute touched me to tears and I wanted to thank those Marines in my own way, but all of our armed forces deserve these thanks and praise. Their service is a gift to the undeserving, a payment in advance for the promise of living our lives to the best of our ability.

Thank you Diplomad. The tears stream down my face now, thanks to your love for these brave men and women who guard our shores, our embassies, our freedom. Would that all of America could see the love these "poor, simple" warriors have for their country and their countrymen. They do not do this for the pay (how could they?), they do not do this for the glory (they won't accept it), they do not do this for bloodlust (they hate death too), they do this for love: love of their family, love of their freedom, love of their country and love of their corps. Their daily sacrifice shames me for not giving 100% of everything I have into everything I do. I dishonor their sacrifice with every moment of wasteful slack. I may or may not be worthy of their tireless effort, but it doesn't matter to them. People may or may not appreciate their willing sacrifice, but that doesn't matter to them either. They do their job because they have chosen to dedicate their lives, and sometimes lay down that life, in the ultimate service to their nation and their people. These men and women are the exemplar of all that it means to be an American. May they always feel the joy and the pride that we owe them, that many of us feel for them and never feel the want of it from those who do not understand the magnitude of the duty they gladly accept every minute of every day.

I have family in the armed forces (mostly Army and Navy). In fact, my cousin's husband just returned from heavy fighting in Iraq. My brother is in the Navy. I am astounded every time I am around these people at the simple confidence they exude in every facet of their military life. I know they wish their personal lives could be as ordered as their "work" life, but Uncle Sam's reach only extends so far (thankfully). I considered joining the military (the Marines if I had qualified) after high school. I didn't. I didn't believe I would be a good fit in a military that expects conformity and is unkind to non-conformity. Indeed, my mouth being faster than my brain at that time, I surely would have found myself in a great deal of trouble. In addition, I didn't trust the Commander-in-Chief or the Administration with my life (at least that's what I believe now, I may be projecting current feelings on the past though since I voted for Bill Clinton in '96, the year I graduated). At any rate, I wanted to express my thanks to our military, especially those who can not be at home with their families this Christmas or Hanukkah because they are putting their lives on the line to ensure that we can be concerned about burning the ham instead of watching another skyscraper burn against a blue sky.

I once saw a woman and a young boy sitting outside my local library as I was walking to put my nearly overdue items in the night drop since the library hadn't opened yet. They were patiently waiting for the librarians to unlock the doors and let them in. I admit I was rushed as I was almost late for work anyway, but I saw the Army uniform this woman was wearing, so sharply pressed and ready for inspection. The boy sat close to her, so I knew they belonged together, although I didn't know if he was her son or her brother. I stopped in my mad hurry, and looked her in the eye and said "Thank you." That was all. I wish I had said more. I wish I had asked her name, where she was headed, what her story was. But I can't blame my shortened schedule. I was just too dumbstruck and shy and, frankly, ashamed to say more. All I could squeak out was "Thank you." I looked at the boy too, to make sure he heard and understood. I wanted to ask him if he knew how important his mother or his sister's sacrifice meant to me. How much my family and I owed this women who chose to strain her family life to protect her family. But I couldn't. And I don't think I had to. She returned my gaze and thanked me! She thanked me for appreciating her. I don't deserve her thanks, but I hope she carries my gratitude with her into battle. It won't protect her, but I hope that my Thank You tips the scale in her mental balance toward her job being worth it, rather than thinking it thankless work for an ungrateful nation. At the very least, I hope it made her day brighter. I know it made mine.

Please, if you see a uniformed member of our military, tell them Thank You. Ask their name. Ask their story. Let them feel the love of a grateful nation and give them the knowledge that they don't fight in vain. We owe them so much more than that, but please, give them what you can. It costs you nothing, and it gives you so much.

Thank you.

Tuesday, December 07, 2004

A Day Which Will Live in Infamy and a Man Who Will Live in Ignominy

Terry McAuliffe, the soon-to-be-outgoing Chairman of the Democratic National Committee released a statement today that leads me to believe I have woken up in some alternate dimension where everything I hold to be true is, in fact, false.

The subject matter was ostensibly a Pearl Harbor remembrance. He praised the unity shown by the nation 63 years ago today as the citizenry learned about a vicious attack on an American Naval base on a clear blue peaceful morning. Of course, he completely glosses over the fact that America was deeply divided at the time about whether they should send supplies, munitions, aid or (especially) troops to Europe or if they should stay home and not get involved in another of Europe's seemingly endless territory wars. Suddenly, the decision was made for them. If Japan could attack us an ocean away from home, then certainly Germany, if successful, wouldn't stop at the shores of the Atlantic. The sleeping giant was awoken and he made ready for war. America did not ask to be included in the war, only to be left alone, but if we would have to fight, we wage war on our terms: complete and to unconditional victory.

After the attack, Americans knew the cost of staying their mighty hands and retreating from the world: isolation, degradation and subjugation. Instead of passively accepting that, we sent millions of soldiers to fight for four long years, and, sadly, a half million to die. We knew the cost of war, but we knew the price of freedom as well.

The parallels to September 11th are unavoidable. There was a war on elsewhere in the world that didn't encroach on our lands (usually), but threatened our values. Our enemies were not content to just attack our allies, but agitated for direct battle with us. This time, however, most of us were unaware of the war waiting for us.

When attacked this time on a clear blue peaceful morning, we again bound ourselves together as Americans with ties of love, patriotism, and (unfortunately) fear. We were one people, one country determined to act while we could to ensure our continued existence and to completely, utterly and totally defeat the enemy who dared disturb our slumber. We would fight, as we have always fought, for peace, for the end of fighting, to rid the world of yet another vile ideology of suppression and oppression, to once again make the world safe for Democracy.

But then, something happened. Something altered the course of our new war from the path of World War II. From complete united victory.

In World War II, we didn't immediately attack Japan and lay siege to Germany. We couldn't. We had to fight the fights we could win, and then hope we did. We fought in Africa to prove our men's virtues and abilities before we could effectively fight in Europe. We fought the Japanese in the Philippines and en route to Australia because we could not yet fight them in Japan. It was understood that this war would be long, would cover many fronts and would be fought, must be fought against all of the enemies of the United States, not just Japan. Germany provided succor and support to Japan in its bid on the Pacific and so they were enemies too (not to mention, of course, their brutal attacks on our cultural mother, England). Americans were united not just on December 8, 1941, but also on June 6, 1944 when the war seemed nearly interminable and we were secretly launching our most ambitious assault, disregarding the uncertainty of victory. Americans believed in the necessity of the war and in the justice of the war.

This time though, the cries for "No Imperial America," "Give Peace a Chance" "This War Can Not be Won" began almost immediately with the commencement of hostilities in Afghanistan. It only quieted when our brute force military chased the Taliban out of Kabul in only two months time. It started its crescendo then as the case was being made for an invasion of Iraq, culminating in the shrill cries of "No Blood for Oil," and the screams of voluntary human shields who willingly placed themselves in front of Saddam's military installations to try to prevent the US from destroying them. Where was the unity? Where was the steadfast belief that America must win the war she's in, whether she started it or not? The War on Terror is a very long war, still in its infancy; a war that must be fought on many fronts (financial, political, social and martial); and a war against another vile ideology of suppression and oppression. But this time, we don't have the charismatic face of Hitler to rail against. There is no Rising-Sun Flag to aim for. Our enemy is faceless. He has no country, no homeland to invade, no border to cross. He is liquid, mercurial, a chameleon, able to attack and fade back into the civilian populace whose attire and appearance he hides behind.

We must be creative and completely united in our struggle against an enemy whose main weapon isn't the ability to make young men willing to blow themselves up in a cafe, but is the ability to make our own media question our motivations or our actions, so that he can point to it and say "They know they are evil and yet they come to destroy us all anyway."

And so the protestors from before the Battle for Iraq and the Battle for Afghanistan played right into their hands by decrying every action of America as evil. Every time someone yelled "No Blood for Oil," a terrorist got his wings. It gave comfort and solace to the terrorists that American could not stomach a protracted war. Americans would call their troops home at the first sight of blood. I am thankful that President Bush is not that kind of man. I am thankful that the American people re-elected him.

The Democrats were united only in that they opposed everything about George W. Bush and America's self-interest. They were otherwise divided in how much they should oppose it, whether America should just declare a stalemate or should be defeated completely to "teach us a lesson," over just which actions contributed to which root causes which caused those poor militants and activists to kill us. Every major issue had 15 different viewpoints in the Democratic Party this year. In fact, their whole nomination was a battle to see who could be more anti-war and still have the credentials to seem the most capable when dealing with National Security.

And then Terry McAuliffe has the gall to say national unity 63 years ago enabled Americans to go forward and defeat the country's enemies, but the same kind of unity needed now was being undermined by Republican disagreements over provisions of the yet-to-be-voted on intelligence reform bill. (Italics quoted from the Washington Post article in the Title Link).

He goes on to say:
"While we as a nation are united in this fight, there are clearly deep divisions within the Republican Party, divisions that are impeding our fight against terrorism."

Wait. The REPUBLICANS are impeding the War on Terror? What was the political affiliation of all of those useful idiots who protested and continue to protest everything America does? Who is the party who could not get a coherent message broadcast to oust a completely oustable President? Who is the party of obstruction? Who is the party of intolerance? Right. Terry McAuliffe's Democratic Party.

He goes on to say:
"Moving forward, it is my sincere hope that the Republicans running Washington will stop playing their political games and start fighting for the American people, just as our honored veterans did 63 years ago."

Of course the Democrats abhor political games and would never be so crass as to play them (like, for instance, using an attack on America to bolster a ridiculous attack on a group of Senators who are fighting to ensure that the pressure to do something doesn't prevent them from doing the right thing). Obviously if the Republicans want to be thorough in the passage of the intelligence reform bill, they are dividing the nation and are divided themselves.

I think McAuliffe is intelligent enough to make his arguments for the Intel-Reform bill he wants to see without subverting the truly astounding sacrifices made and tragedies withstood by America's Greatest Generation (tm) to do so. It is shameful and cheapens those men and women and himself. I think those men and women can handle it with no damage, but I am doubtful of Mr. McAuliffe's ability to endure the same.

Thursday, December 02, 2004

Something is Rotten in the State of France


LGF posted this as one of its "It's hard not to hate the French when..." but I think there is more to it than that.

The article states:
Less than ten days after Hezbollah’s “al-Manar” television station was permitted to broadcast in France, one of its commentators has stirred uproar after he accused Israel of “repeated attempts in the past several years to spread AIDS throughout the Arab world”.

The commentator, who was defined as an expert on the “Zionist entity”, described at length how Israel has been trying to spread dangerous diseases, including AIDS, in the Arab world.

I suspect that this meme is being floated for the benefit of European and Middle East muslims to promote the idea that, of course, AIDS is not a result of poor behavior choices, but rather of a deliberate introduction into the Arab population, leading to a specification of the Palestinian Arabs. The end-state of this is to allow Arafat's nephew to anounce that he died of AIDS and that the Israelis purposely "poisoned" him with HIV so that he would die of AIDS. This way, he will not only be a legendary hero, but also a martyr who was killed by the Zionist Entity. This would, of course, demand more suicide bombers to attack Israelis as retribution. Thus the PA, PLO and Fatah can legitimately drum up international resistance to any Palestinian capitulation in the "peace process" and demand that Israel give up more than they already have as redress for killing their beloved leader.

Give it a month. I will not be surprised.

Personal Domain

I just tried posting this question to the Blogger support desk, but I get an internal error whenever I submit it, so I'm posting it and hoping someone can help me out.

I recently registered misterbixby.com through ENameCo.com. They offer a free re-direct service so that hits there redirect to misterbixby.blogspot.com; however, their method of doing so adversely affects my sitemeter referral logs since all visits appear to come from misterbixby.com rather than the actual referring site. Is there a DNS location I can provide to ENameCo to register the misterbixby.com address to so that it actually points to my blog on blogger? I know that the alternative is that I can have them add my sitemeter HTML to their redirect page so that sitemeter reads it as the same site, but ENameCo hasn't yet responded to my request on this (admittedly it hasn't been long, but I hate kludge). I would like to avoid unwieldy workarounds, so I wanted to know if I could just permanently point misterbixby.com to misterbixby.blogspot.com.

Thank you very much for your assistance,
Paul R. Bixby, Jr.

Frankly, I want to start using misterbixby.com in all of my comment posting to make it easier to remember and a personal domain seems a little more grown-up than a blogger address I think, so if anyone can help me out I would appreciate it.